I think all humans should have the same rights and privileges. Civil Unions are a cop-out.
2007-08-28 09:45:55
·
answer #1
·
answered by FTW 7
·
3⤊
1⤋
We should drop the term "marriage" since it's proving too much of a sticking point. As long as the civil unions would have the same rights and privileges as marriage, it would be wise to just make the concession and be done with it. We could then naturally SAY "I'm married" even though the license wouldn't have the M word on it. Hardly a big deal.
We really should be using diplomacy to our advantage here.
And if you care, here's the analogy I've come up with to help illustrate the injustice of being treated as "less than":
It is patently unfair that I am compelled to pay the same income tax rates as heterosexuals yet not be afforded the same rights and privileges. It's like we're all visiting Disneyland -- we all pay the same admission price, but then I'm told I can't ride, say, Space Mountain and the Matterhorn. It's unfair and unwarranted. So, if I'm barred from those rides, my admission price should have been less than what the straight folks paid. Ergo, since I'm precluded from participating in ALL the same opportunities that heterosexuals have, I should be allowed to pay a proportionally lower tax rate.
2007-08-28 17:01:48
·
answer #2
·
answered by The Snappy Miss Pippi Von Trapp 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
marriage no longer holds the definition of being an institution in which both parties' purpose is to procreate or bind two families together for political purposes. it's been redefined as a union in which two people who love each other are legally bound together for security, protection, and legal equality to other formal couples. if we revert back to the old policy of marriage being a procreational unification, not only will we be denying the legal and religious obligations and protections to homosexuals, but we will also be denying this right to heterosexuals who cannot procreate and those who choose to not procreate. In America, we preach liberty and justice for ALL, not SOME. It's about time we practice what we preach.
2007-08-28 16:57:12
·
answer #3
·
answered by mowz 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
If you are for same-gender marriage then you believe in the US Constitution. The US Constitution is the supreme law of the land and it talks about being allowed to have life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Not being able to marry the gender that we love means we cannot pursue our happiness. The Constitution says we can so we should be allowed to be married
2007-08-28 16:56:24
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
For:
Who you love is not something that you chose and why should you be punished for loving someone just because some stranger doesn't think it's right.
Against:
Medical research claims that homosexuality is a disability cause by a mutation in the hypothalamus in the brain and we should attempt to "treat" it as if it were a handicap as opposed to accepting it.
2007-08-28 16:53:06
·
answer #5
·
answered by Cherry Darling 6
·
1⤊
3⤋
Well, it's the only way I'm getting married.
In all seriousness, I wouldn't want a "domestic partnership"... I want the full rights that marriage offer.
2007-08-28 16:42:45
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
1⤋
Makes me no difference as along as they dont infringe on my rights. But how and why could they. Not for me to judge.
2007-08-28 16:48:06
·
answer #7
·
answered by drew 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
I'm not against it. I think all sound-minded consenting adults should marry whomever they choose. Good luck. 2D
2007-08-28 16:43:38
·
answer #8
·
answered by 2D 7
·
3⤊
1⤋
Marriage has had a definition for centuries.
It has acted as a great environment in which to create and raise the children who will be our future citizens.
It has acted as a stabilizing force in our society.
We need not change it to conform to the whims of a small minority.
.
2007-08-28 17:18:39
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
5⤋
Love is love, and we should cherish it no matter where it has been found.
2007-08-28 16:43:32
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
1⤋